on sunday our live coverage continues at 10:30 a.m. eastern with alan dershowitz. at 11:00 a.m., a discuss with the author on her book. at 2:55, we discuss with the author. at 6:00 p.m. former secretary of state john kerry, with his memoir, "every day is extra kwlgts. watch the miami book fair live this weekend on c-span 2's book tv. c-span, where history unfolds daily. c-span was kraefted as a public service by america's cable television companies. and today we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the

supreme court and public policy events in washington, d.c. and acrowned the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. the national council on u.s. arab relations recently held their annual conference in washington. part of the event included a discussion on palestine. this is an hour and 20 minutes. ladies and gentlemen, good morning. welcome on behalf of the board of directors of the national and staff of the national council in u.s.-arab relation. i'm honored to welcome you to the 27th annual washington policymakers conference. the national council was founded in 1983 as an american nongovernment, nonprofit

educational organization due typical proving knowledge of the arab world. we're grateful for the generous and enduring support of our sponsors. they are listed on the program guide. and behind me. simply put, we could not do what we do without their enduring support. i also want to thank our distinguished speakers and panelists who have traveled great distances and will cover over the next two days share their knowledge and insights. at this time i'll turn the podium over to my der friend dr. anthony. as many of you, dr. anthony needs no introduction. if i were to summarize his accomplishments and honors i would be here for the next-hour and a half. i would refer you to his distinguished bio in the program guide. suffice it to say his knowledge of the arab world is not only broad and deep but unparalleled and greatly respected. he's our national treasure in

that regard. he's dedicated his life to promoting dialogue and understanding. please join me in welcoming dr. anthony to the podium. [ applause ] thank you. we're honored to have mr. pratt as the chairman of the national council's board of directors. he has three and a half decades of direct exposure and empirical experience on the ground. he used those three words education and empirical. we're not into theory we're into reality but also into hopes and dreams and schemes and this particular conference is but one of 11 activities and programs

and projects that the national council has been fortunate to have and been enabled by its supporters, do for months and contributors. many of whom are here with us today. you will see a lineup of specialists and renowned individuals, foreign affairs practitioners who have devoted in some cases all of their adult lives to trying to improve the arab-u.s. relationship. and, of course, can you not do it even leadership across the board, given the fact that there are 22 arab countries and spanning the region fr. the diversity is obvious. the richness of the culture is

apparent to specialists but not to generalists, and one of the hopes and dreams and schemes we have, we know it will take longer than perhaps many of us will be alive when it occurs, is the establishment of an arab cultural institute right here in the center of the nation's capital. at the last presidential election the dehumanizing of arabs and muslim was apparent and it was ugly. no other country has a degree of tolerance by its media and special interest groups for this kind of focus on treating others as just that, others, as opposed to us. treating people as those, as them and not as part of a we.

focusing on these legitimate common needs, common concerns, common interests, common goals. similar goals, complimentary goals. in terms of what we seek to achieve. let's not be bashful about saying we have achieved more than specialists in the media would give as its due. i believe i mentioned that in the last three and a half decades alone, mentioned it to some, we cooperated to drive the last nail in the coffin of the red army, in afghanistan. no one country did it alone, and no one did it by themselves.

this was an usness campaign and effort and it was an usness in its effectiveness. and throughout the same period since 1979, together, not alone, we have prevented the expansion of a radical revolution to the east of arabia and the gulf from expanding to arabia and the gulf. number three, it was america's flag that was put on the oil tankers of kuwait in order to allow to it traverse in more than 550 nautical miles from the opening of the strait to the refineries and export terminals of kuwait. and by no means least, the last time we did arguably the right

thing at the right time in the right way for the right reasons with the right people and the right results was in the liberation of kuwait from iraqi aggression. when iraq did this, it wiped out all three of the criteria forced a mission into the united nations. namely that a country can evidence its national sovereignty, its political independence, its territorial integrity. in all four of the essential attributes of america's own constitution, the united states exists for many reasons but four primary ones and these four primary ones are the first four positions that are filled after every presidential election. and they are embedded in meeting the following four goals. to protect the people's safety.

or internal security, if you will. to strengthen and expand a people's defense, external defense against those who would intrude, invade and occupy and what is there. >> thirdly, to have 2 concern the material needs. the economic well-being, the ability to uphold their standard of living and hence the department of treasury. also, the administration of an effective system of civil justice. otherwise everybody would be packing heat and constantly locking doors and looking over their shoulders. that is what happened in kuwait. those attributes were trampled

underfoot and together with our arab friends we stored -- restored all seven of those attributes that are cherished by all people. so, there is this usness regardless of what you hear -- in terms of what they want to see the media focus on. >> we are going to go now to and who has been a part of the us-ness as long as i have known her. with a going back to a time

that need not be italicized on the calendar but she was a pioneer in bringing back -- bringing about the middle east policy. this is unrivaled in its presentation of otherwise hard to come by descriptions and analyses and indications and prognostications about the realities of the arab world. she will focus on what remains the cardinal moral issue between the people despite its being downplayed in the media. >> in palestine. ann joyce. >> thank you very much, doctor anthony. this is a wonderful gathering. i

pay tribute to you and this organization. no one has ever tried to hold a meeting this big. i can understand how hard it is. it is a wonderful thing. thank you for inviting me. you, honored guests for attending. i see his royal highness in the front row -- welcome. we have a wonderful panel. i am sure that jim will be coming soon. we have been in this field a long time. i will not start with a joke but i do wants to give you a quotation from albert camus from 1942. he said something pertinent. the struggle of self is enough to fill the hearts.

we must imagine synthesis. we get up every day and start a new the struggle that is not so easy. but, it has its rewards. the people on this panel on palestine are young and enthusiastic. i think you are going to hear some excellent reports. i was going to start with jim zogby because of his historical knowledge but we will start with zaha hassan. her biography is in your book. she is a visiting hello this year and has been with other prestigious think tanks. she is a human rights lawyer who is also a member of the palestine policy network. she will be the first speaker. the second will be elizabeth campbell. doctor campbell is the director

of the office and has served on the international organization of affairs which i did not know existed. we want to hear more about that. let's begin with zaha hassan. >> [ applause ] >> good morning. thank you to the organizers of the conference and doctor anthony for inviting me to share some thoughts with you today. what i want to talk about today is the nature of the palestinian relationship to israeli health -- israel. the relationship has been one defined by a series of if only's -- only the arab government and the plo would just do one more thing or not do just one more thing, peace would rain between arabs and

choose and they could live together side-by-side in peace and security in the middle east. the first if only came after the palestinians saw the expulsion of reporters of the indigenous arab population of palestine. at that time the if only plus -- if only israel's neighbors with signed peace agreements with israel israel might allow the palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties. that it only came from the ambassador to the u.n. during israel's bid for membership in 1949. since then we have had arab countries sign two peace agreements and the plo has recognized israel -- but on the single palestinian refugee has been allowed to return to israel. and if-only in the 1980s -- if only they would accept the

resolution in his plan for peace formula, renounce violence and recognize israel, the plo could be a legitimate group for peace talks and peace would be attainable. >> despite the plo accepting these conditions and signing the declaration of principles at the white house under u.s. law the plo remains a terrorist organization. they have had a representative office in washington closed this month. the u.s. consulate -- the office in jerusalem that handles palestinians affairs in the occupied territories have been merged with the u.s. embassy to israel. this signaled an end to the pursuit of a two state solution by the u.s. the list could go on and on but the most dangerous of the if-only --

given the current realities we are faced with today -- i will talk about this. if we don't stand firmly against this we are damning the entire region to a bible-style armageddon. before i tell you about this i want to take you back to the second palestinian uprising that came after the failure of the dave talks sponsored by president trump -- president clinton. >> in december 2000 after the anniversary of the massacre, the architect of those mass killings, sharon, decided to take a few hundred police and some members of his group for a visit to the compound for what he said with a simple visit. he was trying to make a point at that time. he was going to be a candidate for the israeli or -- is really

a ministership and wanted to show them that he was going to be the prime minister that would never compromise jerusalem. predictably the incendiary presence of sharon led to mass protests resulting in the use of disproportionate force by the israeli military and the killing of dozens of unarmed palestinians. in protest over the killings the palestinians citizens of israel stage their own restoration in october. the results of the protests was the killing of 13 unarmed palestinians citizens by israeli civilian police. an independent commission was established to investigate these killings. it took five years to get to a result. ultimately the commission found that the 13 protesters were, in fact, unarmed and posed no threat to the israeli police when they were gunned down. despite these findings those responsible for the killings were never held to account and

the internal police investigation file was closed as was the file of the israeli attorney general. this was a watershed moment for the palestinian citizens. they determined that the structures of government were such in israel that palestinians citizens were never going to get justice under the law and were never going to get equal treatment under the law. therefore the leadership and the intelligentsia of the community inside israel came together for a series of meetings over the course of two years. what culminated from the meetings was that in the year 2007 a paper called the future vision document -- this document called for a number of things including that the state of israel recognized the endogeneity of the palestinian arab citizens and extend equal rights for all under a

constitution. parallel to this document was the preparation of a constitution for israel. a call for israel to declare its borders based on the 1967 line and end the occupation of arab land including an equal rights provision and the right of return for refugees and restitution. the response by the israeli government at that time king just a few months later. it was the eve of the annapolis talks. at that time 2007 he made a new demand on the palestinians. the demand was that the plo must recognize israel as a jewish state if there was to be any comprehensive agreement to end the conflict. most people believed at that time that this new demand was an attempt to foreclose the possibility of palestinian refugees returning to israel.

that was only part of the story. this demand was meant to silence the palestinians citizens of israel calling for equality and restorative justice. also not understood at the time was the critical impact of's demand which was how recognition of israel as a jewish state might also undermine augustinian demands for sovereignty and statehood. i will come back to that later. >> when the peace talks ended because of the indictment on corruption and netanyahu succeeded him, netanyahu ceased on the demand for palestinian recognition of israel as a jewish state and made it a precondition. another new if-only. it came in his speech in june 2009 in which he appeared to accept the 2-state solution.

he said, the fundamental condition for ending the conflict is the public. binding and sincere palestinian recognition as israel of the national homeland of the jewish people. he said he told paws -- president obama that if the israel's recognized palestinians as a jewish state they would be ready to end -- to have a peace agreement. >> obama came to these immense after trying to rein in a settlement construction. in his 2011 speech obama included palestinian recognition of israel as a jewish state as a new u.s. parameter for u.s. palestinian peace. he said that america and the international community can do is to state frankly what everyone knows -- a lasting peace will involve two states for two people -- israel and the jewish state and a homeland

of the jewish people and the state of palestine as a homeland of the palestinian people. each state enjoying self- determination, mutual recognition and peace. >> mutual recognition wasn't simply recognition of political borders but the recognition of the identity of the people within those borders. obama overlooked, however, the fact that 20% of the population of israel was not jewish. what that recognition would mean for their right. in december 2016 secretary of state john kerry during his speech on israel palestine speech reiterated these words. he faced the two states on the u.n. general assembly resolution -- the partition plan which recommended that the creation of the jewish and arab state. secretary john kerry claimed that recognition of israel as a jewish state has been a u.s. position for years. although this had only been true for the last five years of

the obama administration. >> despite what was outlined in his speech the plant never demanded that palestinian arabs recognized israel as a jewish state. after all, palestinians arab would've been almost equal in number to the jewish population inside the territory allotted for the jewish state. with the prepreg -- partition plan did require was that each state uphold democratic principles and protect the civil and political rights of all the citizens under law. forced population transfer to alter the makeup of the arab or jewish state was specifically prohibited. yet this is exactly what this government did in the time neatly before and after the state of aerial was declared in may 1948. since israel occupied the remainder of palestine in 1967 population transfer and settlement construction has -- continue.

with this context we can now appreciate the significance of israel's recent passage of the jewish nation state physical and what palestinians international recognition as a jewish state would mean today. i want to focus on three provisions of the basic law that israel passed and how they function together. the first provision states that only jewish people have an exclusive right to national self-determination in the state of israel. this means palestinian citizens do not have a legal right to citizenship inside israel but they are the indigenous people of the land. second provision states that the jewish people's historic homeland is the land of israel. israel has never defined its borders as a state and the id of a jewish homeland is not defined in the basic law. therefore the area which jewish people may assert the exclusive rights for national self- determination has no limits.

>> third provision encourages and promotes the establishment of -- and consolidation of the jewish settlement without identifying where this is to take place and how it is to be consolidated. as long as israel leaves its borders undefined and fails to guarantee equality under the law for all citizens these three provisions together provide constitutional authority for the complete displacement of palestinians arabs from historic palestine and the denial of their equal rights under law. that is not only the second or third class citizens of the state of israel and the citizenship could be revoked and not only are palestinian refugees not entitled to return to israel -- a restitution of the property and even the palestinians living in the occupied territories are not entitled to self-determination and a separate state or as citizens of israel. this is because the land of israel is the historic homeland

of the jewish people without regard to the claims of others. >> had palestinians succumbed to the pressure to recognize israel and the jewish state as part of the relaunch of peace talks in 2014, the palestinian leadership would have conceded the integrity of their historic homeland to jewish colonization as and settlement as well as discrimination against palestinian citizens and refugees. according to the trump campaign position paper, one of the reasons the trump administration will not support palestinians stated is because palestinians still will not agree to recognize israel as a jewish state. the position paper should be taken seriously because every action item has been achieved the trump administration.

the lesson is, there is no if- only that palestinians could ever respond to that would satisfy israel as long as israel is intent on a greater israel. i was asked to and with the policy recommendations and i have to. the first is, that the u.s. should not be in the business of recognizing ethno nationalism and ethno supremacy in other countries. recognition of israel as a jewish state should not be a u.s. parameter and we should take this out of the u.s. vision of what the piece would look like. it would mean that palestinians would accept indefinite occupation. second, it is long overdue for us to go back to the basics. the basics are international law and that means an end to

occupation restorative justice and equal rights regardless of one's nationality. only then will israeli juice and palestinians have equal dignity. thank you. >> [applause] >> thank you very much. next -- elizabeth campbell. and doctor zogby is here and he will tie up the loose ends. anyone with questions -- that is what the cards are for. please come forward. >> thank you, doctor anthony. it is a pleasure to be on this esteemed panel. it has been quite a year. this year we have experienced what it means to have amended

70 years of a partisan agreement on the approach to this. by which i mean the united states which i am sure you are aware decided formally on august 31 to the longer fund -- having long been the largest, most prominent donor constituting 30% of our total budget. >> in the statement that the u.s. drafted publicly they announced their decision -- among other things it noted that is irredeemably unrwa. we have not received clarification on this. >> most of you have heard about unrwa. if you realize the scale and scope of our operations. unrwa is responsible for educating more than 525,000

students across gaza and the west bank and syria and lebanon and jordan. if you took the school system and put it in the u.s. it would be the third largest after new york and los angeles. indeed it is a sizable public institution. >> we also provide for mary healthcare for 3.5 million refugees who rely on our services. we run 142 health clinics. the third pillar of our work is humanitarian assistance for the most vulnerable families in these areas. today we provide almost 2 million families emergency food and cash relief including half of the population in gaza. today two thirds of the total population living in gazaon unrwa for education and healthcare and a source of

livelihood. the scale and scope of what we do is extraordinary. let's me be clear -- there is absolutely no alternative in the united nations system and the international nongovernmental organization community or at present by any government to unrwa. if the idea is that unrwa has run its course and there needs to be a new paradigm in the middle east, that is fine. we are willing to figure out whatever solution may be advanced. to our knowledge there is currently no solution that would allow for the sustainable transfer of these essential public services that have proven to provide excellent quality

services over several decades. this is a dangerous situation. at risk is quite a lot. and if we are not able to secure the funding we need to continue, we are looking at what i would argue is going to be a very unknown, catastrophic , obviously, to the families but the long-term security implications of this will be extraordinary. indeed, really, what we would be facing is a d development -- de-development across the east. one thing that is extraordinary about unrwa is that it has been able to contribute to the development of a people who, as we all know, are without a state. that is actually, i believe, unmatched in modern history.

it is rare to find an example like that. in our education system maybe some of you may have benefited from unrwa schools. according to the world bank our students outperform their national counterparts by one year of learning. we don't just run schools but truly centers of excellence. the same with our health clinics. we have long achieved 100% vaccination rates. when i asked if senior officials have a plan -- it needs to be concrete. if unrwa didn't exist, who will vaccinate the children? it is in the interest of everybody to continue a program like that. we are also proud of our achievements. since the 1960s 50% of all the children in our schools are girls. that is important.

and despite many different kinds of challenges concretely if tomorrow unrwa is not providing secular education to more than one half million children in these areas, concretely, who will be doing that? who will do that? this is important to remember and i appreciate listening to zaha -- unrwa was once located in vienna. we moved to jerusalem with the aim, clearly, of being part of the ongoing process that would lead to the elimination of unrwa. the idea that there would be some type of just and lasting solution to the refugee question and that unrwa would dissolve and then there would be a way for them to take over the responsibility. we are still in the region.

we are very much looking for a political solution. the job of unrwa will continue to be to maintain the political space necessary for a just and lasting solution. we are providing education and healthcare and emergency relief services in keeping the space open until the time comes. we are obviously deeply concerned. not only about the lack of funding which has created a tremendous amount of instability and general security in our institutions and for the colleagues with whom we work and are varying scales of operation but also more broadly on the growing political attacks against our mandate and our existence. you can read about this in the media. it has been written about a lot. you can also read about it in legislation that has been introduced in the house and in the senate. a lot of this rests on the

false premise that unrwa is very unique and in fact in the world. because, as the argument goes, it is the only agency that allows refugees to pass status to descendents, thereby artificially inflating the total number of refugees, therefore making unrwa a corrupt organization. this is the basic argument that has been put forward. again, you can find this throughout the media and in the legislation. i want to be very clear that unrwa is not unique in this regard. the only other u.n. agency that is also responsible for refugees also exercises practices globally where all refugees pass status to their children until there is a just and lasting political solution to that particular refugee problem.

this set of alternative facts are being actively advanced and they are undermining our ability to deliver services effectively and have us deeply concerned about what will happen in the near term. if i may say something about fundraising, as noted the u.s. historically has provided 30% of our funding. indeed unrwa experienced 70 years of bipartisan political support for the work that we have done. to wake up suddenly early in january to learn that the funding is frozen on the heels of conversations that our commissioner general hat here in washington during which it was explained in great detail that our work was appreciated and valued and would continue, on the heels of having signed an agreement with the state department about tenured funding in 2018, it was

shocking. nevertheless we had no choice but to find a way forward. we have been largely successful thanks very much to other governments and trying to recover some of those resources through other donations. we are, nevertheless, running a deficit this year of about $64 million. each month my colleagues are scraping together every lit a bit of funding that we can for our payroll. the they are largely palestine refugees themselves. our organization limits the work that we do and we have 3300 staff across the region. our situation remains tenuous. it is very insecure. no one knows really what tomorrow will bring. again, as i said, it is extremely dangerous, at least for the families experiencing this turbulence not knowing whether or not they will have schools to which they can send

their children or places where they can receive innocent. i really do not want -- i truly want to underscore the significance of what is happening. to really raise everyone's awareness about the risks involved. i would be pleased to participate in any political solution. it is not about us continuing the status quo as we are accused of, or existing forever. our job is to provide these services which are essential for these families who have no other place to turn for education and for healthcare and emergency relief. that is our commitment. our colleagues are working under extraordinary circumstances to do this. this is a very uncertain

political environment. we have never before been tested in the current way we are being tested. if i could also and as zaha did -- in the policy recommendations in the interest of everyone to continue to fund these vital services until there is some type of alternative. therefore, clearly the policy accommodation is for the u.s. to restore its funding for our governments to step up to continue funding and the second piece relates more to some of the politics i mentioned. next year in the general assembly from where unrwa received its mandate to operate we will be up for renewal. it will be very important that member states come together to again renew this mandate and indeed until there is some type of genuine lasting just solution

. if not, again, it is hard to imagine the kinds of implications that will bring -- that this will bring to the region. thank you. >> [ applause ] >> thank you very much. i will now turn the podium over to doctor zogby. he is an old timer like john and me. i think he started the whole movement of what to do about palestine here in washington. >> and old-timer -- i like that. >> i feel it, too. >> i want to frame my remarks around my last 50 years of involvement on this issue. not quite 50 -- 47. my first experience was in the

camps in lebanon doing dissertation research in 1971. following this all the way to running a project with vice president gore to try to promote economic development in the west bank and gaza. i spent 4 years doing that until the present time. i want to offer three heresies. three observations i have made in the last several years that are informed by the experience of my many decades doing this. >> the first one i want to offer is, based on what i see developing now which is an incremental movement toward

normalization, inspired by the trump administration and promoted by the trump administration but also encouraged by israel and the relief that some have that promoting incremental normalization somehow moves the ball forward toward a just resolution. my experience is exactly the opposite. i remember in the post madrid -- premature read period, the argument was made and i are committed -- i advocated this -- we prepared a paper on strategic peace incentives that we thought would create incremental movement and, in fact, what happened is that the arab states did agree to suspend the secondary boycott of israel. the condition was -- suspend the boycott and israel would agree to free settlement.

once the boycott was ended there was no turning back. israel, on the other hand, did turn back and within a short perkel of time settlement activity began a new. i remember my first trip with the group called builders for peace. i traveled to israel and palestine with a delegation of arab and jewish businessmen. i remember driving past tel aviv. one of the jewish businessmen set i have not been here in three years. what an enormous difference -- as he looked at the skyline. a lot of japanese and korean companies have begun to invest secondary boycott was over. once they had planted roots they were going anywhere. but, settlements continued and

as we see now in the madrid period there were 120,000 settlers. today there are 650,000 settlers. the effort to try to move israel toward feeling more secure and accepted didn't pay off. in fact, it did the opposite, it emboldened them. i remember one thing that came out of oslo was a movement toward bringing the region together for economic investment purposes and we had the first summit in casablanca. the israelis were comical. they were taking pictures. it was like we are here. it was before selfies but nevertheless an equivalent of a selfie. someone would take a picture of them standing next to an arab.

they were excited. rightly so one might say because they had not been able to do business in the arab world and there they were a. the point of casablanca was not for the israelis to do business, it was for creating an international effort to help grow the economy of the west bank and gaza to support the peace process. to create a mutually beneficial economic environment. here is what happened -- israel benefited and the palestinians didn't because the next summit took place in jordan. guess what -- i went with the american delegations and arabs came from all over -- it was one group of businessmen who were not there. it was the palestinians. the israelis refused to open the border to allow them to cross. so, infuriated as we were the argument we made was that the

palestinians at oslo had opened the door and israel had closed behind them. perez spoke at the summit. the arabs were nowhere to be found. the businessmen were not allowed to come. >> then we made the decision to bring as an american delegation of jewish and arab businessmen -- make the effort to have the meeting in jerusalem. so we did. we had the israeli team there and with the had the american business team there. we had representatives from the american embassy. no palestinian businessmen. we got a note halfway through the meeting saying that they were at the checkpoint and they had no permits to get through and the israeli soldiers would not let them through. the effort to open the arab world to israel did not pay off in terms of support for any movement toward peace. from the very beginning israel wanted normalization. they wanted to skip to the end

of the peace initiative and dump everything in between. i'm afraid that is where we are today. every move toward normalization is pocketed with nothing coming back in return. so, my sense is that we need to be very clear that normalization -- not because we want to reject the existence of israel -- it exists -- the minister is right. it is a state. it exists in the region. but the reality is, that doing business with it or accepting it as a normal state in the region doesn't help move forward the effort toward peace. >> the second heresy is, i think we need to be real. there is no 2 state solution that is possible.

it is not going to happen. i think we need to accept this and deal with the consequences. there is no way to look at the west bank today and figure out how you create a viable palestinian state that can exist under the conditions that are currently there. the settlers are not just settlers. many are ideological settlers armed to the teeth and the daily reports of violence against the list and he and i will culture -- agriculture in -- palestinian children is quite significant and unreported. if an israeli is attacked it becomes news and if a palestinian is attacked or his orchards are cut down it is not the story at all. we don't know about this. the plan for the design of the israeli occupation in the west bank has mirrored their plan for what they did in israel proper. they confiscated land around the settled areas.

they built elements in galilee, for example. nazareth was completely cut off. they created -- the term they used was peasants. they took people's whose agricultural and family-owned land were outside the village -- there was a collective ownership. they didn't live in individual small farms as they do in upstate new york. they lived in a concentrated area and they farmed the lands outside of it. what israel did was seize the land and declared them state lands or declare them security zones. then they began to build around. nazareth elite elton on nazareth land. -- ñon nazareth land. some have come to live there but the design was to steal the land so that they would be uprooted from their economic source of wealth.

the same has happened in the west bank. it's not by accident that when you look up close at the maps of the west bank you see a lot of little circles. this is where the villages are. around the villages our state land or settlement. if you go to jerusalem you see this clearly. you see the little religious surrounded by massive israeli concrete housing projects which are built on palestinian land. bethlehem has lost most of its land to israeli settlements. this was declared by the military and then they converted this into a security zone and converted it into a settlement. clinton said no and they did and it's there. who will uproot it? who will make it possible for the organic relationship between

islam and jerusalem to be restored? it's not going to happen. the sooner we deal with the reality of this and stop absolving ourselves of responsibility by saying oh, i support a two-state solution -- they say this as if somehow that makes them feel good. it is not going to happen. saying it doesn't get you off the hook. >> the man should not be for two states but for equality, justice, human rights of both people. palestinians are existing today is -- in what is an apartheid state. it is not going to be, it is. the majority of the people living between the jordan river and the mediterranean are now palestinian arabs. they are denied equal rights. they are denied justice. they are denied human rights. that is unacceptable. we need to recalibrate this.

>> my third point is, this has to do with recognizing the significance of the leadership of the palestinian community inside israel. the citizens of israel. i remember when i first did my dissertation we were dealing with the revitalization movement. how societies under stress react by developing new consciousness. i have done some work with native american movements. one of my advisors said why don't you work with the palestinians? they are under stress. try to see what is happening in the development of a new idea movement. off i went to lebanon to the refugee camps and sat down with people and collected their stories and build up notebooks. then a palestinian novelist talk to me and said you are in

the wrong place. the people in the camps have not developed a new consciousness. they have frozen the old consciousness. it is the logic of being a refugee where you develop an idea of the past is somehow romanticized. so, they were living in the 1930s and 1940s, believing that that was the palestine they wanted to create. he said the place you should go is to look at the arab citizens of israel. that is where you consciousness is developing. i want. i found a group of poets that developed a remarkable new sense of what it meant to be palestinian. they had been decapitated before the 1948 war. most of the leadership was gone. they were landless and struggling to survive.

israel had expelled the leaders of the movement and they continued to rebuild. as i walked in -- zaha was talking about this. the significance of a nationwide movement what amounted to civil disobedience was amazing. the mayor of nazareth was elected and he said we will cut off your aid. he turned to the international community and brought youth brigades to nazareth to do the road construction and the cleanup of the projects that would no longer be done by state funds. he got this done in a different way. if you look at the list today and the significance of this body -- what amounts to the largest group in the opposition. the second largest group in the opposition. this is of enormous consequence. if the joint list can increase the number from 13 to 15 to a

small percentage -- it will be impossible to form an israeli government without somehow dealing with the importance of the arab block in israel. they are 20% of the population but they represent a significant political force that needs to be understood and encourage. arabs should no longer ignore the significance of this group. i don't think palestinians should ignore either. the leadership has become bankrupt. it is no longer capable of providing a vision for the future. the leadership in gaza is worse. i think the real leadership now is coming from this group which , i think, can play a significant role and needs to be recognized as such. >> policy recommendations -- none. i really believe that where we are here in america is in a

different place than we've ever been before. i do not think anything will pass through congress. i think we will get a new congress with some remarkable people but the changes that will take place in america will somehow lag the changes taking place in the region. we are not going to lead to. what we will do is get a new group in congress that reflects a new public opinion that despite the difficulties in the administration and from the pro- israel groups, will make some changes. i think unrwa will get its funding back. i think there will be pressure to do that. i think you should listen to what elizabeth had to say. she is a remarkable person doing a remarkable and needed job at a critical time for the palestinians and for humanity. is not just as you know, a problem for the palestinians, it is a problem for the region.

you cannot trade palestine lebanon and jordan. the consequences for stability in lebanon and jordan are enormous. it is -- it -- there is no way for the state and the region to deal with the. i think we are in a difficult situation requiring a need to recalibrate. it does not require normalization. it means that we have to stop taking about two states and thick about different visions for the future. how do we create a different reality in the middle east providing for the security of israel and the israelis and security for palestinians and create a new vision for the future in which they exist is equal with human rights and human dignity to for both. thank you. >> [ applause ] >> thank you very much. problems like this are never solved, they are only traded for better problems.

i would like to give the speakers a chance to say something about the question of whether -- what shall i say -- abandoned some of these international law precepts or gains made by the palestinians. and go for a focus on one state shared by two people. it is a difficult thing to give up the gains people have made in favor of international law. does anyone want to speak to that? >> >> i think we are well the line -- will be on issues of political solutions. if you asked the palestinians on the ground, given that 70% of palestinians are 30 or younger, they are not

interested in the idea of two states. they don't see that they are giving up something for an uncertain future. their future is uncertain and they are living under incredible depravation and access with movement restrictions a new future in terms of what to do with themselves following a college education. they don't have a vision for what their future could be. to talk about political solutions to them is a nonstarter and they don't really care about that. what they are interested in is whatever is right and whatever space that might be -- whether a palestinian or israeli state or a confederation of states. the idea that they would be giving up something -- giving up gains made with oslo is something they don't understand

because they don't see any gains made. >> what i would say again is what you think about unrwa, think about institutions. we have built institutions that are extraordinary. they are institutions that represent extraordinary development and achievements. across the region. we have sadly seen what it means in the middle east to destroy all secular institutions of higher education related to human health or whatever. went you think of unrwa think about this. when people tell you that unrwa must go and they start to give you the political argument, remember unrwa is our institution. until there is a way for other entities to run these institutions, it is deeply dangerous absent any type of

solution to talk about destroying unrwa. unrwa is an institution. i agree with my colleagues to whom i completely differ on the policy and political angles but there is nothing on the horizon that leads any of us in unrwa to think that now is the time to close our doors. >> i have given doctor zogby two questions. >> the question is -- what are the implications of meeting and what about the israeli ministers visiting? >> first, this plays an interesting role. they are neither here nor there. they are part of the gcc but

they do not side in anyone camp. they were the instrumental group in beginning the negotiations with the u.s. and iran. none of us knew about this until it happened. they have relations with the saudi's and relations with the iraqis and with others. they continue to have relations with iran. i frankly don't know what happened but there may be a game a foot. we will find out where it goes. i am of the opinion that meeting with netanyahu accomplishes very little. this is not a leader who wants to compromise and has the capacity to compromise and doesn't understand the meaning of the word. the agreement that bill clinton patted himself on the back for

accomplishing -- for getting him to sign -- has been devastating for the palestinians. what is happening today and the expansion of the -- the city of -- the wedge cut out of the middle. imagine taking washington dc and knocking out k street. a lot of people might like that. >> okay, take out connecticut avenue and what would you get? how would the city be functional? this is not functional because of what happened. that was an agreement that he made that secured his gains but not for palestinians. it encapsulated them and that was what actually happened. so, i don't know what they are doing but, again, they have done things in the past and we will see where this goes. with regard to the israeli

ministers visiting abu dhabi, the varieties have been gaining an international role for themselves. everything from sports to -- renewable energy. one condition of having these events take place in their country or being the headquarters for the renewable energy at the united nations office is that they have to accept all countries who are participants. i didn't make a whole lot of going for this sports competition. either abu dhabi has the sports competition or it would allow -- instead of boycotting israel it would mean that arab countries

are being boycotted by international events and international organizations for not agreeing to have one nation particiipate. so to me it is the consequence of gaining an international profile and international leadership in different areas. >> i don't make a lot of this. it is different than welcoming and israeli office to open in their country were beginning to do overt trade relations with the state of israel. that is a very different thing. in the polling we done we have found that there is no acceptance on the part of arab public opinion for any forms of these efforts at normalization. there may be back channels that open here or there and conversations that occur over issues of regional security.

they do not amount to normalization. precisely because you will not have any overt movement in that direction for most every countries because it simply is too risky in terms of stability. and you know, if the fear is iran and extremism, one of the best ways you can give iran and extremist groups leverage over you is by doing something that violates what is, in fact, the accepted opinion in all of these countries and that is making overt gestures to israel, bringing them to the table and doing overt business with them. that is something that is not going to happen anytime soon. and it is smart that he not happen. >>

would anyone like to comment on thatzzc